Most
of the critics seem to be extolling the virtues of the crop of 1997 Brunello di
Montalcino wines. Consumers are being told that this is a stellar vintage,
one to fill the cellar with.

For those of us who follow the wines EVERY YEAR, this is somewhat amusing and
horrifying at the same time.

Amusing is the fact that there are many very fine 1995 and 1996 Brunello
wines. These are by-passed by people with the 1997
"myopia." Horrifying is the price being asked by
producers/importers/retailers for these wines.

The wines were tasted were good. As I tasted them, knowing their price
tags, I wondered if consumers can't find Sangiovese wines from other Tuscan
appellations which offer as much quality as did this group of wines.
Having, like many wine enthusiasts, read the glowing reviews with huge 95+ point
scores, I wondered why I wasn't more impressed with these wines.

Can it be that the various wine critics are swayed by the prestige and
reputation of these wines that their scores are inflated?

I'd propose this: How about presenting a set of Brunello di Montalcino
wines and telling The Critics they're tasting "Tuscan Sangiovese"
wines. Then, how about presenting the same set of wines and alerting them
to the fact that this new set of wines is one of Brunello di Montalcino.
I'd be curious to see how many more points the wines garner with the tasters knowing
they're tasting more prestigious wines.

I included an obscenely expensive
bottle of Chianti Classico in our tasting. I was curious to see if it
would stand out amongst the Brunello wines. Statistically the wine fared
poorly. Nobody shed a tear when we unveiled this baby!

8th Place: CASTELLO DI
AMA 1997 CHIANTI CLASSICO "Vigneto Bellavista" (the 'mystery
wine')Castello
di Ama produces a lovely Chianti Classico and a couple of "single
vineyard" wines which are ridiculously priced. They tripled the price
of these vineyard-designated wines a few vintages ago and continue to ask prices
that reflect the scarcity more than the quality. Bellavista is an 8,000
bottle production of Sangiovese with 10% Malvasia Nera. One taster
described it as being "grapefruit-like," while another person
encountered an "anise" note in the wine. More than one taster
was overwhelmed by the tannic structure of this wine. Others felt the wine
was "flat," with one taster finding a note of
"persimmon." Bob said it had a nice "fruit skin quality to
the nose, but a queer, sort of oxidized element to go along with the
exceptionally gritty tannins."
I rather liked the nose, finding typical berry and cherry fruit along with a
hint of oak. It seemed to veer off into a really ripe plum, verging on
prune fragrances. I liked the richness of the wine on the palate, along
with a slightly earthy note to the flavor. Needing some further cellaring
to soften the tannins, I'm afraid at this silly price, I won't be stashing any
bottles of this! One to one-and-a-half stars on my three star scale.
(No stars being an ordinary or average quality wine.)

7th Place: ANTINORI'S 1997 "PIAN DELLE VIGNE"One
taster said this has a "fruity tangy-ness" and wondered if it's not
"too alcoholic." A couple of other tasters detected a
"watermelon" character to this wine, with one person feeling this is
"watery and diluted." Someone else found it "a break from
the tannic monsters." One participant found this to have an
"odd, grapey fruit character with some sweet, strawberry jam notes but, on
the whole, not really ripe or mature fruit." Another taster found
"currants and black cherry with some earthy notes and cola on the
finish."
I found a sweet cherry fruitiness here with a note of resin or eucalyptus.
On the palate the same characters are present with a hint of pear and
berry. I'm giving it a one-and-a-half star rating.

6th Place: ALTESINO "MONTOSOLI""Unripened black fruits, this tart red wine has some undertones of
a leathery character." said one fellow. Others were less enthralled
by the nose, one person feeling this showed "Brettanomyces"
(leather/saddle/corn chip/meaty aromas). Another person found it had a
nose reminiscent of "fecal matter." Others detected more
"barnyard-like" aromas with one person finding "earthy, tobacco,
leather and barnyard fragrances." Someone else encountered aromas
reminiscent of "baker's yeast, with fine-grained tannins, nice intensity
and a spicy, Vermouth-like character." Bob Gorman said it had a
"severe" character with "no ingratiating elements here."
I found some woodsy notes to this, along with a meaty fragrance and a hint of
cherries and eucalyptus. It's more like a Chianti on steroids. The
tannins suggest this needs a lot of cellaring and the backbone of acidity ought
to carry it for many years. One to one-and-a-half stars.

5th Place: ANGELINI "VIGNA SPUNTALI"The
tasting panel interpreted the aromas of this from a number of different
perspectives. One person found it "Rich and ripe fruit on the nose
with hints of violets...complex, with strong fruit and spice."
Another found it to have a fragrance reminiscent of "airplane
glue...weird!" Someone else found "butterscotch with big wood
and big fruit." Another taster keyed on a note of "ginger and
this carried through on the palate, too." Someone found a note of
"bell pepper," while another found it a stereotypical Italian red:
"old, tired and short." One person likened it to "cough
syrup." Another felt it was the "...most mature wine of the
group, showing an older nose...milk chocolate notes, unripened plums and a note
of tobacco on its rather vegetal finish."
I found the oak here to be out of whack. It sports a slightly
"burnt" character or smoky note that's a bit acrid and sharp.
That same "feature" comes through on the palate, making for one rather
odd wine. I'm not sure if this is worthy of a star.

4th Place: SIRO PACENTIOne taster found notes of "mercaptans and sulfides," while
another taster said it smelled like the aftermath of a fireworks display.
Someone else interpreted the nose as "pine pitch with some dusty notes and
fruit of baked apples backed by some gritty tannins." One fan
described this as "Bordeaux-like...exquisite...sinewy and a strong,
cherry-like character." Another taster found the nose to be
"stinky," but like the "nice cherry fruit on the palate."
I found the sulfide notes at first, with a "weedy" character in the
mix, but I either became desensitized to this or it blew off, as I felt the
fragrances really blossomed in the glass. I liked the final pass through
this, finding the nose quite a bit better after some aeration. It's nicely
packed on the palate with moderate tannins but good fruit to back them up.
One-and-a-half stars.

3rd Place: GAJA'S PIEVE SANTA RESTITUTA "RENNINA"One
person found this to be the "...most drinkable with peppery notes and some
caramel and oak...tamarind and loganberry with a grapefruit note."
Another panel member found it to be "rich and polished, with mocha and some
mineral notes." It was described as "floral and minty" by
another taster with someone else saying "it's got the prettiest bouquet and
is straightforward with some sweet oak and mouth-drying tannins." Bob
Gorman also found the tannins to be "mouth-drying."
I found the fragrances to be quite normal for Sangiovese: cherry and berry
fruit. There's a light spiciness to this with a sweet, almost peppery
quality. The fruit comes through nicely on the palate, having about 5-10
years of cellaring potential. One-and-a-half stars.

2nd Place: CASTELLO di BANFI "POGGIO ALLE MURE"Described by one panel member as "dusty with currants and an earthy
finish," this wine was almost universally well-rated.
Another person found it "open and showing bittersweet chocolate and dark
fruits. It's the most drinkable of the tasting." Someone else
found the aromas reminiscent of "caramel." Another
person found those fragrances a combination of "coffee grounds with smoked
meat and pomegranate aromas."
I found some mildly cedary fragrances with intense berry fruit and a note of
licorice. The wine has a fair bit of tannin, yet seems to offer enough
fruit to match. Good depth. Cherries and some anise notes on the
palate. Two stars+.

1st Place: GAJA'S PIEVE SANTA RESTITUTA "SUGARILLE"Finishing
well ahead of the pack in this tasting, Gaja's "Sugarille" bottling
was described by one taster as "sleek, rich and polished, with juicy plum
notes and some blackberry fruit." Another person felt it was
"big, opulent and thick, having good aging potential." Someone
else disagreed, saying "It's not opulent, but more like skin and
bones." A final critic found "good fruit, nice acidity with a
long, well-balanced finish and more finesse than anything else in the
tasting."
I detected nice oak to the nose with some mocha or coffee notes along with
berryish fruit. It's fairly tannic, yet youthful, big, deep and probably
with enough fruit to carry for ten to 15 years in the cellar. Two stars+.

Please note: The wines tasted are not always wines
we have (or have had) in the shop.
Many bottles are merely for our enological exploration.
Price quoted are current at the time of the tasting, but may be different
when you're reading this.

WE HAVE NOT ORGANIZED A TASTING IN A WHILE...
BUT WE DO POST THE RESULTS OF A PRIVATE TASTING GROUP THAT'S BEEN MEETING FOR
MORE THAN 40 YEARS!

We are working on
organizing some blind-tastings at the shop.
Send us a note to indicate your interest in participating.
These would be on Wednesday evenings and you'd need to bring 8 wine glasses.